Out of body experiences -brain and selfhood

One of the stranger things to get reported and then subjected to religious and spiritual speculation is the OBE. He's some research that anyone with interest in new spiritualities and brain/spirituality stuff should check out (and certainly those of us involved in interface with new spiritualities are likely to have come across it): Out of your head: Leaving the body behind - life - 13 October 2009 - New Scientist And here's your whetting the appetite titbit: "Other brain regions have been implicated too, including ones close to the TPJ. The emerging consensus is that when these regions are working well, we feel at one with our body. But disrupt them, and our sense of embodiment can float away. This does not, however, explain the most striking feature of out-of-body experiences. 'It's a great puzzle why people, from their out-of-body locations, visualise not only their bodies but things around them, such as other people,' says Brugger. 'Where does this information come from?'"
Be aware as you read the article that the question doesn't get answered with experimental data: only speculations, some of which seem reasonably well-founded but the question isn't really answered. There are some who have a vested interest in mind or soul-body dualism who are very keen to interpret such data as we appear to have in such a way as to support the idea of a 'detachable' something which goes beyond the body. I'm skeptical -partly because it raises further questions about the means of sensing and the means of information storage and retrieval without a brain in direct contact; so an affirmative on this idea just opens up a whole can of worms. Not that such a consideration should foreclose the issue; just that it seems it complicates things. I'm also skeptical because a Christian view of personal wholism doesn't need to defend or even propose a soul-body dualism. The idea of the resurrection of the body would seem to indicate that if it were possible that soul or mind could exist independently of material support, then it is not a state to be desired or set too great a store by ...
I could say more but I'll leave it there -for now at any rate.

Why dowsing makes perfect sense -kindo'

We need to pay attention to this kind of thing because it relates strongly for some people to issues of belief and spirituality. The New Scientist opinion piece is not unympathetic and it's value is in drawing attention to one factor involved for some in issues of belief etc. It's here: Why dowsing makes perfect sense - opinion - 29 July 2009 - New Scientist. A concluding sentence from the article gives us the skinny: "We take a perverse pleasure in things that confound our senses, which is why conjuring tricks are delightful and science can seem a killjoy. The physicist Richard Feynman once said that science is a way of trying not to fool yourself. What he didn't say was just how much fun fooling yourself can be."
So for many people involved in New Spiritual Milieu stuff, this is a factor. And, actually, for some involved in some signs and wonders Christian stuff, this is a factor too. I would also suggest that it it part of the popularity of fantasy novels and the like. We have a serious cultural 'thing' going on in reaction to the erosion of mystery and the prosaic-ness of science as popularly perceived. Perhaps part of the difficulty in getting kids to study science is cultural disenchantment? And in such an atmosphere perhaps a greater proportion of those who do are then reacting against the romantic wistful 'magicalism' abroad in some popular culture? That could explain the Dawkins' types to some extent.

How to respond as Christians? Well, I think we have a difficulty; largely the heavy-handed debunking Dawkins-style is not a straightforward choice: there are personal issues related to helping people to mature in belief, for example within the Christian faith and a bull-in-a-china-shop approach to challenging people's beliefs is often counter-productive; gently, gently does better; direct challenge usually produces retrenchment. The same goes for those involved in new spiritual milieu circles: I want to affirm their curiosity and openness to there being more things in heaven and earth than dreamt of in our philosophies, but I also want to question the credulity -especially as it is a selective credulity which not only is incredulous of certain aspects of science but also of Christian claims too. It is a delicate operation to encourage people to emotionally detach from cherished beliefs, especially when they have the frisson of 'confounding our senses' and tapping into that delighted-child emotion when seeing a conjuring trick done well. "If anyoen causes one of these little ones to stumble ... " ?

Lost History-Tarot Cards

I've mentioned before the tarot and how the major arcana /triumphs are capable of Christian interpretations (and see their evangelistic potential here). As a brief introduction to the historical background this YouTube vid can probably not be bettered (unless you know otherwise?)

And to see an interesting and sometimes moving usage of the imagery in Christian prayer, try this:

YouTube - Lost History-Tarot Cards

Interdependency?

Have a look at this: Jonathan Rutherford: The new Conservatives say that there is such a thing as society, but are they prepared to pay for it? | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk. There's a very interesting prospectus for the future of culture and politics: "Interdependency will be the new political virtue. Individual market choice will no longer command policymaking. Instead relationships will be the priority. Emotional life, not rational choice, is the glue that holds society together. Emotional intelligence and trust, not micro-management, is what makes organisations function well. Emotional liveliness, not testing, creates good education. Collective enterprise, not competitive individualism, is at the core of a successful economy."
This certainly rings bells with what a lot of sociological writers seem to be saying regarding the current 'mood' of western society where the turn to the subjective is in full swing. Bauman charts it in his various 'Liquid' books. Heelas calibrates it against current spiritual and religious trends. I would say it is only a matter of time before it finds expression more fully and formally in our society. The thing is; how does it gain practical political expression? And then the big question: how do we as church respond? Read Heelas and Whitehead, and you'll get a sense of the shift and how awry the 'classic' form of church and proclamation are from what is culturally shifting. I think, actually, that Heelas overstates some of the characterisation of the subjective turn in a way that overplays the distinctions. Nevertheless we have the theological resources to meet this, an Irenaean theology would work much better, for example, in my opinion. If you want to think more, you could do worse than look at John Drane's 'New Age' work. And you might like to look over my MA thesis for clues as it deals with life coaching and spiritual direction in a cultural context and so attends to many of the concerns.

Acupuncture Shows Promise In Improving Rates Of Pregnancy Following IVF

An intriguing bit of research showing a 10% improvement in pregnancy rates using acupuncture. Here's the synopsis: Acupuncture Shows Promise In Improving Rates Of Pregnancy Following IVF and this is the summary of the results.

"acupuncture given as a complement to IVF increased the odds of achieving pregnancy. According to the researchers, the results indicate that 10 women undergoing IVF would need to be treated with acupuncture to bring about one additional pregnancy. The results, considered preliminary, point to a potential complementary treatment that may improve the success of IVF and the need to conduct additional clinical trials to confirm these findings."

Of course be careful of the preliminariness of this and also note, as I keep saying with complementary therapies that degrees of proven success are not endorsements of the traditional explanations for them therapies; you can get something right for the wrong reasons or impose on some results an incorrect interpretation. This is not proof that chi philosophy is right, merely that some people with that way of looking at things made a useful discovery at some point which they were able to harmonise with their beliefs.

Cultural creatives chez France

Just found this handy little résumé of the characteristics of 'cultural creatives' on a French emerging church website.

"Les <>
* Sont pour l’écologie et le développement durable.
* Reconnaissent l’importance du rôle des femmes dans la société.
* Sont dans l’être davantage que dans l’avoir et dans le paraître.
* Sont pour la connaissance de soi et ont une sensibilité pour ce qui touche la spiritualité.
* sont ouverts sur le monde.
* Sont défavorables au développement économique à tout prix et s’impliquent au niveau collectif."*

It's interesting that this list pretty much corresponds to a list I use for teaching about post-modern spirituality which draws a lot on John Drane's writings about New Agery. It reminds me quite a lot of the characters in Les Particules Elementaires.

(*which being interpreted for the non-Francophonic is:
-are for ecology and sustainable development.
-recognise the importance of the role of women in society.
-are into being more than having are image.
-are for self-knowledge and have a spiritual sensibility
-are open to the world
-are against economic development at all costs and see themselves as part of a whole.)
www.temoins.com - La culture chrétienne interconfessionnelle: See also here and here -both in English.

New agery, science and outcomes

Nice and pithy characterisation:

Rachael Kohn: The main legacy of the New Age Movement would be hard to pinpoint absolutely, but I would say that it is the combination of the scientific and the spiritual in a way that promises "results" for the practitioner in the short term. It is a highly practical approach to "outcomes" and is therefore short on ethics and long on expediency.

Journeys In Between: Curious Obsessions: An Interview with Rachael Kohn

Technorati Tags: newagery, science, religion

Spirituality but not Church

Times Online - Times 2Further quotes from that Times article on Paul Heelas's newest book>
So what does meditation have that conventional worship does not? Neutrality, suggests Elizabeth Forder, who runs the centre. “We are not affiliated to any religion and there is no belief system imposed on anybody here,” she says. “I was brought up a Christian, but it held no real meaning for me. I would class myself as a universalist, believing that all religions offer the same end. At its simplest, meditation is giving the body and mind a very deep level of rest, freeing us to be ourselves.” She mentions an 87-year-old man who used to belong to the congregation and now meditates regularly.

I have a split-reaction on this and it keeps me alert to what I do when I offer 'neutralish' meditation sessions. One reaction is to say that there is no neutral standpoint and in this case to point out that the myth of a neutral standpoint suits a universalist well since it's part of their ideology. She's not offering neutral 'artefacts', it will be shot through with assumptions that relativise non-universalistic spiritualities to her own, presumably, self-spirituality based on western cultural assumptions.

So how can I offer 'neutral' meditation? Well I guess I am upfront about my perspective in the introductory remarks and offer a set of techniques which I have found in some form used also in other religious or even non-religious traditions and settings. I try to offer them in a way that doesn't but up hard against particular viewpoints and invite people to feedback to me if there turn out to be areas where my assumptions or presuppositions grate against theirs. I hope that this models a form of Christianity that can then offer some of its treasures in a way that over the long-term can help Christian spirituality and mystical practice seem plausible to others. In a sense to say; "why keep looking east for all of this stuff; it's on your doorstep..."

Next bit of the quote:
If disaffected churchgoers are seeking neutrality, they are also in flight from judgment. “I don’t want to be preached at any more”, “I’m sick of being made to feel guilty” or “I don’t need to be told how to live my life,” people will say when asked why they stopped attending church. And when they speak of their spiritual malaise, they use the language of the therapist’s couch. One Kendal woman in her forties summarised her spiritual shift thus: “A one-hour service on a Sunday? It’s not really enough time to address your self-esteem issues, is it? I didn’t find any help in the churches. I found it in a 12-step programme. That was the start of my personal journey.”
Which seems to me to sit well with concerns of emergent church that there should be a whole-life emphasis and a practical spirituality. Self-esteem is an improtant issue for many people and we need to think our way round this carefully as Christians since our heritage of how we interpret original sin makes us prone to abusive interpretations of humility. In this respect I commend this book: which I mention in the books column of this blog under "Commended".